Although Election Day is still about a month away, things don’t look good for opponents of California’s Proposition 60, a ballot initiative that would require the state’s porn films to all use condoms: 55 percent of voters support the law and the “Yes on 60” folks have raised $4.6 million into the campaign while the “No on 60” folks have raised $411,768. Gay porn blogger Zachary Sire asks why the multibillion-dollar porn industry hasn’t raised more to fight the law (link NSFW).

Prop 60 is kinda fucked up because it’s written so broadly as to possibly require performers to wear safety googles while fucking; it also would allow anyone watching porn “to pursue civil suits against an adult film’s producers or anyone with a financial interest in the production if the state does not take certain actions” against bareback porn studios. The law also treats condoms like the end-all-be-all of STD-prevention while ignoring the existence of PrEP; that makes sense considering that the anti-PrEP AIDS Healthcare Foundation has invested nearly every penny into getting the law passed.

A similar law passed in Los Angeles survived a court challenge earlier this year but resulted in a sharp drop in the number of permits issued for porn shoots the year after it was passed. In addition to Prop 60’s aforementioned downsides, the “No on 60” folks say that porn producers will flee California if it’s passed, depriving the state of millions.

OK first this is NOT in any way shape or form a condom law, so get that out of your head. It is an enforcement mechanism for existing condom law (yes it the law in all 50 states) In short it give AHF the standing to sue and recover money that they spend on infected performers, it also gives performers the standing to sue on their own behalf. Constitutionally it is a VERY different law than the existing condom laws.

I don’t care how you come down on prop 60 but I do want you to understand it properly before you vote for/against it.